Home Politics & Debate
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Camp X-ray=right or wrong?

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
Am sure everyone has seen the news or read the papers about the treatment of prisoners in camp x-ray and that they should have human rights. Personally I think they should be given some terror treatment the same as the treatment they gave the whole world with all the activities they agreed to do when they joined the terrorist groups.

What I want to ask all the human right activists is what about the american journalist Daniel Pearl??? What about his treatment by the terrorists group Harkat ulmujahideen, which has been a gun pointed to his head and pictures taken. Dont see anybody over there protesting about the treatment he has been receiving.

My conlcusion is that the prisoners at camp x-ray are being treated ok and that the human activists should shut there cake hole and concentrate on other things.

Anyone agree or disagree??????

P.S To Daniel Pearl, I only hope that his release comes sooner rather than later. My thoughts are with him.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They are being treated perfectly well. They are being treated better than most normal criminals in the US justice system.

    People are only complaining because the fucking media released those photos and said thats how they were treated all the time when they were really just photos of their arrival at the base.

    I feel really sorry for Daniel Pearl. I doubt very much that he will live through this. I think we will see him being tortured in the very near future. <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    <STRONG>I feel really sorry for Daniel Pearl. I doubt very much that he will live through this. I think we will see him being tortured in the very near future. <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0"></STRONG>

    Thats the kind of optomistic bright cheery outlook I love hearing about from you Balddog. Thats a really grim thing to put.

    As for those Taliban scum, I think they are being treated too well. They supported the murder of thousands of 'innocent' people, the dead are the ones deprieved of their senses. Sensory deprivation 24/7 I say, followed by a damn good kicking. Has everyone forgot what these men where a part of?

    [ 29-01-2002: Message edited by: Kirk ]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    May be grim but its true. Ive seen too many videos of the fate of prisoners of Islamic groups.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Afganies are eating better, and getting better medical care than they would have in their own country...

    Ever see the vid of the Russian dismembered?

    Ever see the body of the US helicopter pilot drug through the street and defiled by the Somali Muslim's?

    Whose complaining about the US not taking the higher moral ground??? <IMG alt="image" SRC="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Thanatos...AGAIN:
    <STRONG>Afganies are eating better, and getting better medical care than they would have in their own country...

    Ever see the vid of the Russian dismembered?

    Ever see the body of the US helicopter pilot drug through the street and defiled by the Somali Muslim's?

    Whose complaining about the US not taking the higher moral ground??? <IMG alt="image" SRC="confused.gif" border="0"></STRONG>


    The al-qaeda are scum. But Thanatos, you have to ask yourself. Why was the Russian dismembered? Because his government had taken it upon itself to invade Afghanistan. The Afghans were quite rightly a little pissed off about that. Wouldn't you be if the Russians invaded the USA?
    As for the US helicopter pilot, why were you in Somalia anyway? And why did you open fire on a horde of unarmed people? And why did the helicopter pilot get out of his helicopter???
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere,

    Must you take issue with everything Thanatos says? I wish you two would stop this petty bickering and hijacking of threads.

    The Russian soldiers didnt get a choice about going into Afghanistan. They were all conscripts. Thanatos was merely pointing out that these people are very brutal. Remeber that British troops have taken it upon themselves to invade Afghanistan at the moment. I take it you are happy to see them brutally tortured should they get captured?

    The helicopter thing he is talking about is the Black Hawk down thing. The US were there on a UN mission and one of their helis was shot down by the Somalis. Nobody opened fire on a horde of unarmed people. If I remember rightly, it wasnt the pilot who was dragged naked through the street but one of the soldiers(Shuqhart or Gordon).

    Whowhere, you seem like a decent guy but you make yourself look like a tit when you argue just for the sake of argument. You have just defending the actions of terrorist organisations and their torture of soldiers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    None of us ACTUALLY know what has gone on or is going on in camp x-ray - BUT if they are being treated badly - IT SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING - we are meant to be civilised. the only reason the americans have taken them to cuba is because US law doesnt apply there - soesnt that say something? - Secondly - we dont know what these people are guilty of or if they are guilty of anything at all, they might just have links with the network which doesnt necesarily mean they are part of it. and even if they do - they have not necessarily killed anyone or done anything illegal - Even psycotic killers that kill for no appaerent reason are protected under the law!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    None of us ACTUALLY know what has gone on or is going on in camp x-ray

    Um, yes we do. There have been tons of groups checking on the status of the prisoners, including the Red Cross. The prisoners there are not, I repeat NOT being treated badly.

    I thought the same thing about the law not applying in Cuba but apparently it does. The base is considered US soil, like an embassy, and is therefore covered by US laws.
    Secondly - we dont know what these people are guilty of or if they are guilty of anything at all

    Firstly, they were captured while fighting against US or NA forces.

    Secondly, does every country on earth not arrest people before their trial? Of course they do, its standard proceedure. If the police(US) think you are guilty of something then they will arrest you and jail you. If they find out you are not the person they thought you were, or that their evidence isnt enough then you get released.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    no, we dont actually know. the US govt. could stop any information they didnt want to come out (in many ways)

    Also - the point about the not guilty thing is - everyone is calling them evil and saying they deserved to betreated bady but what if theyre not guilty

    ALSO if they were captured fighting against US forces why cant they be treated a prisoners of war?? - because america cant take the fact that they were ACTUALLY attacked so they wanna invent law to deal with it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>no, we dont actually know. the US govt. could stop any information they didnt want to come out (in many ways)


    Arent we being paranoid here? The IRC was INVITED in by the US and many of the inspectors have either left or are still there monitoring the situation - I think by now one of the Euro wimps would have started howling to the moon if any of these losers were mistreated.


    Also - the point about the not guilty thing is - everyone is calling them evil and saying they deserved to betreated bady but what if theyre not guilty

    Hmm Al Qaeda - guilt by association, anyone of this ilk should be killed on International broadcast.
    Taliban? Given their love for human and womens rights...maybe not evil but damned worthy of contempt and scorn. Secondly, seeing as how their government sponsored and supported al qaeda, they too are indeed guilty.

    ALSO if they were captured fighting against US forces why cant they be treated a prisoners of war?? - because america cant take the fact that they were ACTUALLY attacked so they wanna invent law to deal with it.</STRONG>


    Simple, its obvious the US forces are still sorting that out - there is evidence that Taliban and Al Qaeda forces have cross alleigance - John Walker Lindh for example, was a Taliban soldier (and reigning piece of shit) who was trained by Al Qaeda - the association is entirely suspect and therefore no, theyre not prisoners of war, but all suspects in an ongoing terrorism / mass murder investigation.

    Let anyone associated with this group hang.
    <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh come off it Londongurl. With the enormous amount of international attention on that base, the Americans cant hide anything. are you saying that the Red cross and all the other organisations and diplomats are all lying?
    Also - the point about the not guilty thing is - everyone is calling them evil and saying they deserved to betreated bady but what if theyre not guilty

    But they arent being treated badly. Why cant you understand that?
    ALSO if they were captured fighting against US forces why cant they be treated a prisoners of war??

    Tim McVeigh believed he was fighting against the US govt as well, should he have POW status? How about the IRA? They fight against the UK, should they be classed as POWs? Terrorists/Guerillas/Partisans/Spies are specifically excluded by the Geneva conventions.

    The US isnt inventing anything. Unlawful combatants is just a description. The Al-Queda prisoners are not protected by the geneva convention. Its very simple to understand if you read it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Also - the point about the not guilty thing is - everyone is calling them evil and saying they deserved to betreated bady but what if theyre not guilty

    What??!?!??! Is a man holding a AK47 and firing it at US and NA forces mean hes not guilty and that he the was there and didnt mean to be, do you think Osama took a receiver and shoved it up his ass and controlled him using a transmitter, some how I dont think so.

    These men knew what they were doing, they new the exact second they decided to fight for the terrorist group, what more evidence do we need, a written declaration?????
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere:
    <STRONG>As for the US helicopter pilot, why were you in Somalia anyway? And why did you open fire on a horde of unarmed people? And why did the helicopter pilot get out of his helicopter???</STRONG>


    Ask those questions at www.bhd93.com
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere:
    <STRONG>


    The al-qaeda are scum. But Thanatos, you have to ask yourself. Why was the Russian dismembered? Because his government had taken it upon itself to invade Afghanistan. The Afghans were quite rightly a little pissed off about that. Wouldn't you be if the Russians invaded the USA?
    As for the US helicopter pilot, why were you in Somalia anyway? And why did you open fire on a horde of unarmed people? And why did the helicopter pilot get out of his helicopter???</STRONG>

    Was speaking of the Muslim terrorists in Chechnia, bin Ladens "troops" "deployed" there... Video clips have been widely circulated of Russian soldier being dismembered by the Muslim terrorists...

    If you are too lazy to research concerning the incidents in Somalia... Effects of their civil war, between the various war-lords (sound familiar <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> ) had brought about the starvation of hundreds of thousands of Somali's. US Marines and other UN troops (notably the Pakistani's) escorted the humanitarian aid efforts to fed and care for the populace. Those UN forces were attacked by the various warlords, and the supplies commandered (as in STOLEN), along with the humanitarian troops murdered. The major antagonist warlord responsible for the commandeering of UN humanitarian supplies was being tracked, and the effort which resulted in the "Blackhawk Down" scenario came from the attempted apprehansion of said warlord.

    What "horde of un-armed people"??? Been watching "Rules Of Engagement", and cannot separate fantasy from reality, again???

    You might take some advice from Balddog, and do a bit of study of current events and recent history before you present yourself as the definitive ass within your zealous attempt at confrontating me... <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by DevilMan:
    <STRONG>

    Hmm Al Qaeda - guilt by association, anyone of this ilk should be killed on International broadcast.
    Taliban? Given their love for human and womens rights...maybe not evil but damned worthy of contempt and scorn. Secondly, seeing as how their government sponsored and supported al qaeda, they too are indeed guilty.


    <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0"></STRONG>

    By "ASSOCIATION" thats the point - they have not necesarily condoned anyone being killed - or agree entirely with it! - MCarthyism in the 50's there were so many communists guilty by "association" and it turned out to be things like - having a friend who was a comunist! WTF? & i think it was the other way round - al qeida sponsoured the government - where would such a poor government get so much money from?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    <STRONG>
    But they arent being treated badly. Why cant you understand that?

    THe point was that people wouldnt care if they were being treated badly!!


    Tim McVeigh believed he was fighting against the US govt as well, should he have POW status?

    he got better status than they have.


    How about the IRA? They fight against the UK, should they be classed as POWs? Terrorists/Guerillas/Partisans/Spies are specifically excluded by the Geneva conventions.

    Ok - so why didnt we go and bomb their base in northern ireland? AND the american government was harbouring many members of the IRA! - Why didnt we stick them in prison & all those associated with them???

    The US isnt inventing anything. Unlawful combatants is just a description. The Al-Queda prisoners are not protected by the geneva convention. Its very simple to understand if you read it.</STRONG>
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by wuckfit:
    <STRONG>

    What??!?!??! Is a man holding a AK47 and firing it at US and NA forces mean hes not guilty and that he the was there and didnt mean to be, do you think Osama took a receiver and shoved it up his ass and controlled him using a transmitter, some how I dont think so.

    Guilty of WHAT? fighting a war? then that would = prisoner of war!? I think the issue is if htey are linked with al qeida or not. and firing at an army doesnt proove that.

    These men knew what they were doing, they new the exact second they decided to fight for the terrorist group, what more evidence do we need, a written declaration?????</STRONG>

    Actually they were captured fighting for the TALIBAN - the government of that country. YEAS most of them knew exactly what they were doing (probably all the ones that were caught) but some of the Afghan nationals didnt know what they were doin!

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    he got better status than they have.

    Are you serious? He was shackled at all times we saw him. He was kept in a tiny cell for 22 hours a day, away from the sun. After a few months of that, they executed him...Thats better than the conditions in Cuba?
    Ok - so why didnt we go and bomb their base in northern ireland?

    Because that problem was better solved with diplomacy. Something that wasnt working with Afghanistan...The UN had been talking with the Taliban for years to try and get them to extradite Bin Laden. They wouldnt.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    <STRONG>

    Because that problem was better solved with diplomacy. Something that wasnt working with Afghanistan...The UN had been talking with the Taliban for years to try and get them to extradite Bin Laden. They wouldnt.</STRONG>

    THe diplomacy in N.Ireland has been goin on for longer than the taliban has been in power! and it took a long time just to get a ceasefire which would sometimes get broken.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thats irrelevent LondonGurl. Military action would not work in NI. It is working in Afghanistan.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>

    By "ASSOCIATION" thats the point - they have not necesarily condoned anyone being killed - or agree entirely with it! - MCarthyism in the 50's there were so many communists guilty by "association" and it turned out to be things like - having a friend who was a comunist! WTF? & i think it was the other way round - al qeida sponsoured the government - where would such a poor government get so much money from?</STRONG>


    Hmm didn't condone the attacks - actually days after 9/11 Mullah Omar cited several reasons for the attacks - among them the Palestine situation, US oil interests and our supposed oppression of ISlamic peoples globally. If this isn't justification for cowardice - I'll never know what is.


    Your comparison to McCarthyism is misguided and uninformed. The association is this: Afghanastan harbored and aided bin Laden for decades; allowing him to train his people for jihad against American interests. They knew all along he was there, thus harboring an international fugitive from justice. Finally, when demanded to turn him over under threat of US action, they refused - foolishly and thus subjected their people to direct martial action.

    Where'd they get the money? Well bin Laden is a multi billionare many times over, recieving funds from many enterpises operating all over the world and the US. That money has been traced to the Taliban (illegal) regime for some time. Additionally, lets look to some other punks - ie Iraq, Syria and other America hating nations - thats where such a "poor" country gets its money.
    <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    <STRONG>Thats irrelevent LondonGurl. Military action would not work in NI. It is working in Afghanistan.</STRONG>


    But it's not working - do you seriously think that now all would be terrorists will stop and think "no, I wont join this organisation because if i get causght they might bomb my country or capture and kill me!" - I doubt it. and they wont just suddenly forget about whatever it is they have a problem with. - BUT in NI they're slowly at least trying to sort things out.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LondonGurl.

    Simple question.. Is the Al-Queda group and the Taliban still able to operate effectively from Afghanistan? Do they have a base of operations from which to launch terrorist attacks?

    The military action is achieving what it set out to do. Destroy the Al-Queda presence in Afghanistan and capture Bin Laden. The first part of that is done and the second is being done.

    You think worldwide terrorism would stop if the US spoke with Bin Laden? Your idealism is pleasant but incredibly naive in todays world.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    [QB]LondonGurl...

    You think worldwide terrorism would stop if the US spoke with Bin Laden? [QB]

    Bin Laden opened the "dialogue", and chose the language. It was his second attempt at the WTC... bin Laden has been behind MANY acts of terrorism in MANY countries...

    Bin Laden's biggest miscalculation was thinking that the same gutless liberal coward Klinton was still in office, and that the US would respond as Klinton did to the actions in Somalia. Regardless of the fact that GWB is ignorant of your gentle sensitivities - and if he was aware he STILL wouldn't give a damn - GWB HAS a pair, and they clang when he walks.

    You bring a war to the US, and we WILL hunt you to the ends of the earth. If you CANNOT deal with that, and brings emotional turmoil to your world of insecurity, then ADJUST your attitude and comport yourself in a manner that will NOT pizz off the warrior that the US has as Commander In Chief!
    Your idealism is pleasant but incredibly naive in todays world.

    Not to be contentious, Balddog, but it goes beyond "pleasant" and toward FARCICAL... <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    SERIOUS QUESTION ~ LondonGurl: Are you really that overly sensitive, or do you go looking for excuses to be offended?

    btw ~ Colin Powell is definitely NOT a hawk... He is likely the SOLE reason that Sadam is still a thorn in the world's britches. If the Politician Powell had not interceeded, then you could be waterskiing at the resort on Lake Bagdad, rather than Powell putting the brakes on and weenie-ing out when the US forces had the momentum to route the Iragi's ALL the way to Bagdad.

    MUCH y'all have to learn... <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>Actually they were captured fighting for the TALIBAN - the government of that country. YEAS most of them knew exactly what they were doing (probably all the ones that were caught) but some of the Afghan nationals didnt know what they were doin!</STRONG>

    Again, only two countries on this planet recognized the Taliban as the lawful government of Afgan-land... and the UK was NOT one of them... <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    Just curious... how many captured "Afghan nationals" did you interogate to support your hypothesis? ... or just speaking out your "hat", again? <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    ANOTHER SERIOUS QUESTION ~ How young are you? I have no desire to verbally abuse a child, and I am taking that you are about 14 years old from the nature of your posts...

    [ 31-01-2002: Message edited by: Thanatos...AGAIN ]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If we (by that I mean the free and just and righteous west) give them a little terror treatment, we will be no better than the terrorists themselves.

    Human rights were granted to everyone, no matter what they have done or to whom. It is a basic right to life - do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    They have food, water, shelter and clothing. That's all they need.

    snoogens
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If we (by that I mean the free, just and righteous west) give them a bit of terror treatment, we would be no better than the terrorists themselves.

    Human rights are for everyone, no matter what they have done and to whom. It is a basic right to life - do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    It shows that we are becoming a more civilised society - admittedley with the exceptions, fanatical terrorist and religious groups etc.

    snoogens
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Thanatos...AGAIN:
    <STRONG>

    <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    Just curious... how many captured "Afghan nationals" did you interogate to support your hypothesis? ... or just speaking out your "hat", again? <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    ANOTHER SERIOUS QUESTION ~ How young are you? I have no desire to verbally abuse a child, and I am taking that you are about 14 years old from the nature of your posts...

    [ 31-01-2002: Message edited by: Thanatos...AGAIN ]</STRONG>


    What hypothesis would this be. I'm talking with my knowledge from nespapers, books & other investigative journalism. Actually i'm 15 and just because you do not agree with my opinion it doesnt mean you have to undervalue my poste.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by DevilMan:
    <STRONG>


    Your comparison to McCarthyism is misguided and uninformed. The association is this: Afghanastan harbored and aided bin Laden for decades; allowing him to train his people for jihad against American interests. They knew all along he was there, thus harboring an international fugitive from justice. Finally, when demanded to turn him over under threat of US action, they refused - foolishly and thus subjected their people to direct martial action.

    Where'd they get the money? Well bin Laden is a multi billionare many times over, recieving funds from many enterpises operating all over the world and the US. That money has been traced to the Taliban (illegal) regime for some time. Additionally, lets look to some other punks - ie Iraq, Syria and other America hating nations - thats where such a "poor" country gets its money.
    <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0"></STRONG>

    Can you not understand what i'm trying to say? I wanst referingto Bin laden, I was refering to the prisoners in camp x-ray (title of this post)

    When I was talking about Afghanistan being a poor country - IT IS!!! - the money came from Bin ladens organisation - not vice versa - which is what i said!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So good you said it twice????^^^^^^^

    Anyway, the thread - I think you all know my feelings on the war - total support for the action in Afghanistan. I hope that the US get the Phillipinos and any other supporters of the Al Qaeda scum.

    However, that doesn't excuse how you treat the prisoners of the 'war'. To maintain the claim of civility we (the US & the UK) must maintain a civil approach. If that means following the Geneva Convention then so be it.

    The prisoners were taken from Afghanistan, blindfolded, were given ear defenders and were manacled hand and foot. They were then flown half way around the world and put in cages, outside. On arrival they were shaved (thus insulting their religion) and sprayed with 'disinfectant'.

    Some of that I can understand, though sensory deprivation is considered torture, and is usually followed by interrogation
    Marine Major Steve Cox, Camp X-ray
    <STRONG>This is not interrogation, this is an interview process</STRONG>

    Sorry, but can someone tell me the difference.

    The next thing is that we talk about them as the Al Qaeda prisoners, except there is one person the US captured who isn't there - John Walker Lindh - the American. Funny that, does he get a different sort of justice?

    That said, the US can keep the Tipton Terrorists they have there (for our US members, the three UK citizens you have are from a place called Tipton)

    Have you all forgotten the very basis of justice in the US/UK. Innocent until proven guilty. To date not a single prisoner has appeared in a court of law, and as such should be treated with the UTMOST respect. Cuff them yes, but caged outside regardless of weather conditions, blinfolded (at times)?

    Ten seconds are they have been found guilty, you can hang them for all I care.
Sign In or Register to comment.